“Let’s Go Brandon” in the Classroom: When Political Speech Crosses the Line
The phrase “Let’s Go Brandon” has become a cultural flashpoint — a coded way to insult the sitting President using language most educators wouldn’t allow in a middle-school hallway. When two Michigan students wore sweatshirts with the phrase to class, administrators asked them to remove them. What followed was a First Amendment lawsuit — and an important new Sixth Circuit decision that clarifies just how far student free-speech rights extend inside the schoolhouse gate.
I. The Case: B.A. v. Tri County Area Schools (6th Cir. Oct. 14, 2025)
Two middle-school students sued after being told their “Let’s Go Brandon” sweatshirts violated the district’s dress code, which banned “lewd, indecent, vulgar, or profane” language. The students argued the slogan was political speech, not profanity. The district argued the phrase was vulgar speech disguised as politics. The federal district court sided with the school, and on October 14, 2025, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals — whose rulings bind Tennessee schools — affirmed that decision.
II. The Court’s Reasoning: Vulgarity Trumps Politics
Judge Nalbandian, writing for the majority, grounded the opinion in Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986), which allows schools to restrict vulgar or lewd speech even when it has expressive value. While “Let’s Go Brandon” contains no explicit profanity, the court emphasized that everyone knows what it means — a euphemism for “F*** Joe Biden.” Because of that, the school could reasonably treat the phrase as vulgar, even if it expressed a political sentiment.
The majority held that the dress-code enforcement was viewpoint-neutral, aimed at the manner of expression, not the political message itself. Under Fraser, that was enough to keep the shirts off campus.
III. The Dissent: A Warning About Overreach
Judge Bush dissented, arguing that Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) — not Fraser — should apply because the shirts caused no disruption and contained no explicit profanity. In his view, “Let’s Go Brandon” may be crude, but it’s still political speech. Allowing schools to re-label unpopular political slogans as “vulgar” risks viewpoint discrimination. Bush warned that if the majority’s logic stands, any controversial phrase could be silenced simply by calling it vulgar.
IV. What This Means for Tennessee Schools
This case matters because Tennessee schools fall under the Sixth Circuit’s jurisdiction. Here’s what it clarifies:
Political Speech Is Still Protected — Students can express support or criticism of public officials.
Profanity Isn’t Protected — Even implied profanity may be restricted under Fraser.
Euphemisms Count — If a phrase is widely understood to mean something vulgar, the school can prohibit it.
Viewpoint Neutrality Is Key — Schools must apply the same standard to all students, regardless of political stance.
Document Decisions — When enforcing dress-code rules, note that the restriction targets language, not politics.
V. Practical Takeaways for Administrators
Be Consistent — Apply the same rule to every student. If one group’s slogan is banned for vulgarity, the same must apply to all.
Train Staff — Help faculty and office staff understand the difference between political and profane speech.
Keep Context in Mind — A phrase might be harmless in one setting and disruptive in another.
Document Decisions — Record the reason for restrictions (e.g., “phrase interpreted as vulgar under dress code §2”).
Stay Within the Lines — Don’t punish students for their viewpoint. Punish the profanity — not the politics.
VI. The Bottom Line
The Sixth Circuit’s message is straightforward: Students have the right to speak, but not the right to be vulgar while they do it. In Tennessee, that means schools can restrict slogans like “Let’s Go Brandon” without violating the First Amendment — so long as they do so consistently, document their reasoning, and make clear that the rule targets vulgarity, not viewpoint.